Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:33:15.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of concentration of suspension and inert material on the assimilation of algae by three bivalves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

R. L. Foster-Smith
R. L. Foster-Smith*
Affiliation:
The Dove Marine Laboratory, Cullercoats, Northumberland
*
*Present address: Department of Zoology, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Assimilation efficiencies reported for bivalves vary, but different experimental conditions, in particular the concentration of the suspension at which the animals are fed, may affect the values found. Widdows & Bayne (1971) determined the assimilation efficiency for Mytilus edulis when fed Tetraselmis and they found that efficiencies decreased with increasing concentration of cells. Allen (1962) fed radioactively labelled Phaeodactylum to Mya arenaria and Venus striatula and suggested that the amount of P recovered in the faeces was proportional to the amount of algae ingested rather than to concentration of suspension directly. However, Winter (1969) concluded that for Arctica islandica and Modiolus modiolus there was no relation between assimilation efficiency and concentration of algae.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , May 1975 , pp. 411 - 418
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. A., 1962. Preliminary experiments on the feeding and excretion of bivalves using Phaeodactylum labelled with32P. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 42, 609–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster-Smith, R. L., 1975. The effect of concentration of suspension on filtration rates and pseudofaecal production for Mytilus edulis L., Cerastoderma edule (L.) and Venerupis pullastra (Montagu). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 17, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galtsoff, P. S., 1959. In:Culture methods for invertebrate animals, eds. Galtsoff, P. S., Lutz, P. E., Welch, P. S. & Needham, J. G., p. 33. New York: Dover.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. J. & Bayne, B. L., 1972. Active metabolism associated with feeding in the mussel Mytilus edulis L. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 8, 191–212.Google Scholar
Van Weel, P. B., 1961. The comparative physiology of digestion in molluscs. American Zoologist, 1, 245–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdows, J. & Bayne, B. L., 1971. Temperature acclimation of Mytilus edulis with reference to its energy budget. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 51, 827–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, J. E., 1969. On the influence of food concentration and other factors in filtration rate and food utilization in the mussels Arctica islandica and Modiolus modiolus. Marine Biology, 4, 87–135.Google Scholar